I use freeware and OpenSource software because I cannot afford to buy all the software I might otherwise prefer. Because of this I can not donate to every project. What other software I use is either by purchase or barter — occasionally by commission of programming minions in a department or three itself still either purchase or barter.
I am leary to use the non-install version of MediaInfo given the developer mindset who yielded to temptation, but they are available to the brave:
“Don’t take candy from strangers”
It is excellent advice. Why take candy from strange developers offering the moon and more? Say no to opencandy — it’s bad candy, it’s evil candy. This applies equally to developers- and would-be users of opencandy infected installation wrappers. Do not deceive yourself into believing inflicting greyware on your users is a benefit to your users.
What kind of system rights are necessary to install software for the most part? Admin rights. What kind of rights allow malware to spread in most systems? Admin rights. What better way to spread greyware, malware, display tracking and ads than in software that necessarily has admin rights?
In this way opencandy, is a satanic scourge upon an otherwise great community of selfless developers. opencandy is badcandy, no candy at all, but promises to lure hungry developers, much as advertising networks prey on merchants and those who display the ads. Tempting the concupiscence of software developers with potential goods and delivering harm to end users is truly wicked. The developer yields control of that user space to opencandy in naive trust at best.
An excellent example of corruption of development was the once fine transcoding application: MediaCoder. Amidst a scandal of “creative” licensing the developer foolishly embraced opencandy after a string of other ill conceived revenue plans and killed a massive following of users. I no longer trust MediaCoder versions after 0.7.1.4490 and I have neither the time to laboriously examine copious lines of source (exception: firefox extension) nor the desire in the wake of deceit.
Is alienating a userbase of potential donors or casting doubt on integrity worth the risk of a dalliance with opencandy? If the value of a product is so esteems to extract compensation from users then abandon the donation model switch to a paid model. Website cowards hide behind a similar illusion to avoid the ego challenge of adopting a paid model for content or services valued only by the producer: displaying ads is not valid a business model. No more than someone who watches broadcast tv who leaves the room on commercial a theif. Nor is promulgation of greyware a valid business model: therefore nor is opencandy.
W3i, the other adware which demands admin rights AND survey completion, ought be avoided also. W3i is evil
important: though linking to osnews I am not a member state of the obamanation as they are.